On 16/07/07, John Sonnenschein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/16/07, Ian Murdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dave Miner wrote: > > > The project has to have a clear statement of what it will be initially - > > > is it a desktop that will attract people to OpenSolaris, or a minimal > > > base core to be used in building a bunch of distros? I believe that Ian > > > and Glynn have expressed strongly the former. > > > > Yep. In my view, we're first and foremost building a distro that > > will grow the userbase. We should also have some notion of a core > > that's the compatibility baseline for derivatives, but I believe > > that's secondary and can be done as a subsetting exercise once we > > get to the distro. I strongly agree with "minimalist" though in > > the sense that we shouldn't ship multiple options--where > > we can, let's just pick one and make sure it's integrated and works. > > Missing something? It's just a "pkg install" away; and, if it's > > something big like KDE, things like "Kindiana" will no doubt emerge. > > > Or if we ship KDE and someone wants Gindiana > > In the vein of minimalism, why not ship a minimalist WM like fluxbox > and avoid the flame war altogether. Really, shutting me up about this > issue is a simple vote away, but nobody seems to want to consult the > community.
Popularity contests are not always the best way to decide things. I mean, look at who the US ended up with as president last time *ducks*... -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. " --Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
